Paschal Adaus

7/30/2019 Paschal Adaus

1/42

PROJECT TITLE: DESIGN OF GRAVELROAD AT MBAGALA.

CASE STUDY :SAKUPROJECT TYPE: DESIGN.

STUDENT NAME: ADAUS PASCHAL.

ADMISSION NO: 1001016998


2/42

INTRODUCTION

Saku is located at Mbagala in Temeke municipal where people use as the

habitat. The existing road was the earth road which being used for transportation,

due to increase of people and traffic volume now days the road does not

perform well means of transportation. Gravel road is needed in order to improve

transportation in Saku. The scope of this is 2km.


3/42

PROBLEM STATEMENT

The increase in traffic volume, population and social activities in Saku, the

earth road does not perform well means of transportation. The loose of

confortability of road user, extent damage and loose of sufficient camber on the

road surface.


4/42

OBJECTIVES

GENERAL OBJECTIVEThe main objective of this project is to design the gravel road from Mzambarauni to

saku 2km long.

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE

Design of gravel thickness layers which can withstand the expected traffic loading

during the road services.


5/42

OUTCOME

The design documents.


6/42

METHODOLOGY.

Literature review

Data collection

Data analysis and design


7/42

LITERATURE REVIEW

The road that will be designed is that which will accommodate the maximum

number of vehicles which are used by the previous road. This due to an

increases in traffic volume, social activities and business activities at Saku now

days the road fail to perform well means of transportation. The road expected

to be designed should have the following characteristics:

i. To offer the complete freedom to the road users.

ii. Easy to short distance travel.

iii. Speed movement that will related to severity to accident.


8/42

DESIGN FACTORS

The design factors to be considered1. Design wheel load

2. Strength of sub grade

3. Climatic condition

4. Pavement component materials


9/42

STRENGTH OF SUB-GRADE

These are the natural soil of the design place. It is very important layer that carry the total

load imposed on the road surface .The strength of the sub-grade should be designed from

the CBR value minimum 15% if found less than 15% soil stabilization should take place .Sub

grade sample are be taken at an interval of 250m from the chainage of 0+00m.

The lower the CBR value the thicker the pavement component


10/42

SUB-BASE /BASE COURSE.

These are the major pavement layer which carry the imposed wheel load and distribute to

the sub grade. This layer should be stronger enough .The materials are place on the prepared

sub grade which may be used as wearing course. Heavy compaction must done to improve

stability. The CBR value factor is considered in provision of thickness of this layer.


11/42

WEARING COURSE

This layer carries the total wheel load and transfer it to the sub base or base course.

Always be smooth and well compacted of the materials which being used in design. This layer

will be provided according to the Laboratory tests results of materials.


12/42

TEST TO BE DONE

The following tests are to be done and used in design of each layer:

Attertberg limit (LL,PL and PI).

Sieve analysis.

Compaction test (MDD and OMC)

CBR test.

CBR value design 90% ile =0.1(n-1)

where, n=is number test.


13/42

DESIGN OF WHEEL LOAD

The weight of vehicle imposed on the pavement layer may affect the performance of

road surface. These vehicles causes damages are known as commercial vehicle which are

measured by Standard Axle load (S.a.L).

One SaL=8160kg or 8.16tone which is measured by Equivalent single Axle (E.S.a).

E.S.a =[load/8160kg]4.55 or [load/8.16tone]4.55


14/42

TRAFFIC COUNTING

These process of counting the total number of vehicles passing through the road is to be

known. These process is done at 12 hours to the commercial vehicle. Throungh traffic

counting process Equivalent Standard axle are obtained. In this case the Average Daily Traffic

(ADT) are included to determine the total number of commercial vehicle passing per week or

per year.

Cumulative Equivalent Standard axle Load also is to known.


15/42

TRAFFIC COUNTING CALCULATION:

E.S.a =(load/8160kg)4.55 or (load/8.16tone)4.55

ADT =Total number of vehicles counted

7days

Standard axles per day (t) =standard axle/day

C.E.S.a.L =365xtx[(1+r) n _ 1]

r

E.S.A.L= 365ADT(1+r) n

r

Where, r=Growth rate of road

n=Design life of a roadADT=Average Daily Traffic.


16/42

DATA COLLECTION

The following data were collected in order to continue with the project:

1. Soil Laboratory test on the following :

Compaction test

Sieve analysis test

Atterberg limit

CBR test2.Traffic counting

3.Assessment on rainfall intensity

4.Surveying data.


17/42

Compaction test

Project: Chainage(km) 00+250 Offset

Client: T/Pit No Date 31/01/2013

Operator Adaus Paschal Sample No. ApprovedTEST METHOD CML TEST 1.9, ref BS 1377:Part4:1990

METHOD TEST No. 1 2 3 4 5 6

WEIGHT OF SAMPLE (g) 4000

WATER ADDED (%) 100 200 300 400 500 600

WEIGHT of MOULD +SAMPLE (g) 5470 5550 5600 5640 5677 5665

WEIGHT OF MOULD (g) 3685 3685 3685 3685 3685 3685

WEIGHT OF SAMPLE (g) 1785 1865 1915 1955 1992 1980

WET DENSITY (kg/m3) 1785 1865 1915 1955 1992 1980FACTOR OF MOULD: 1000

MOISTURE

CONTAINE

R No C8 C14 D57 D24 D68 C23

WEIGHT

OF WETSOIL

+CONTAINER (g) 177.8 204.5 210.6 217.1 242.3 292.5

WEIGHT OF DRY SOIL + CONTINER (g) 176.6 198.6 202.8 206.9 225.8 268.8

WEGHT

OF

CONTAINE

R (g) 86.1 84.9 96.7 94.4 81.6 88

WEIGHT OF WATER (g) 1.2 5.9 7.8 10.2 16.5 23.7

WEIGHT OF DRY SOIL (g) 90.5 113.7 106.1 112.5 144.2 180.8

MOISTURE CONTENT (%) 1.3 5.2 7.4 9.1 11.4 13.1DRY DENSITY (kg/m3) 1762 1773 1784 1792 1787 1751


18/42

MDD (kg/m3) = 1793 OMC (%) = 10.3 NMC (%) = 4.0

1740

1750

1760

1770

1780

1790

1800

1 5 9 13

Drydensity(

kg/m3)

Moisture content (%)

MDD (kg/m3) = 1793 OMC (%) = 10.3 NMC (%) = 4.0


19/42


20/42

SILT SAND GRAVEL

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00

Percentag

epassing(%)

Sieve size (mm)

Gradation Curve


21/42

Dar es Salaam Institute of Technology.

Civil & Building Engineering Department.

Materials Testing Laboratory.

TO BS 1881 : Part 116 : 1983 ATTERBERGS' LIMITS TEST

CLIENT : BH No.

LOCATION : SAKU Sample No.

OPERATOR : ADAUS Depth(m):

DATE : 05.01.2013

Test No. 1 2 3 4

TYPE OF TEST LL LL LL LL PL PL

Initial dial gauge reading mm 3.5 2.6 2.4 2.5 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.4

Final gauge reading mm 17.8 17.9 19.7 20.6 21.6 22.8 25.4 26.5

Cone penetration mm 14.8 17.7 20.1 23.7

Container No. 29 43 59 8A

Mass of wet soli + container gm 54.30 64.20 60.60 55.60Mass of dry soil + container gm 53.40 62.50 58.50 53.70

Mass of container gm 29.10 29.70 28.30 31.00

Mass of moisture gm 0.90 1.70 2.10 1.90

Mass of dry soil gm 24.30 32.80 30.20 22.70

Moisture content (w) % 3.70 5.18 6.95 8.37

Cone penetration mm 14.8 17.7 20.1 23.7


22/42

Liquid limit : 17

Plastic limit (PL) 10

Plasticity index (PI) 7

Linear Shrinkage (LS) NP

12131415161718192021222324

2526

2 5 8 11

CONEP

ENETRATION(mm)

MOISTURE CONTENT (%)

CONE PENETRATION (mm) / MOISTURE CONTENT (%)

`


23/42

Motorize traffic Mon Tues

Wed

Thurs Fri

Sat Sun

Total

Cars(saloon&RAV4) 111 92 67 52 98 73 72 565

P/ up&Vans


24/42


25/42

SURVEYING DATA.

LOCATION:SAKU ROAD OBSERVER:ADAUS PASCHAL

BS IS FS RISE FALL RL RM

1.56 100.27 TBM

1.43 0.13 100.40 RIGHT

0.59 0.84 101.24 CENTER

1.07 0.48 100.76 LEFT

2.35 0.09 0.02 100.74 RIGHT

2.48 100.61 CENTER

1.98 0.50 101.11 LEFT

0.95 1.76 0.22 101.33 RIGHT

1.50 0.74 0.21 101.54 CENTER

1.35 0.15 101.69 LEFT

1.50 0.15 101.54 RIGHT

1.63 0.13 100.41 CENTER

2.76 0.13 100.28 LEFT


26/42

Dar es Salaam Institute of Technology.

Civil & Building Engineering Department.

Materials Testing Laboratory.

CML Test 1.11( BS 1377:Part 4: 1990 and TMH1 method A8: 1986)

Client: Bearing value at CBR

Project: SAKU ROAD 2.5mm 5mm Values

Chainage: Top (%) 19 20 39

PIT No. Bottom (%) 18 15 33

SAMPLE No.: SUB GRADE Average CBR Value 19.0 18 36

Depth(m):

Date: 12.01.2013 Pr. Constant 0.23 kN/div

Compaction effort4.5kg 5 layers

62 blows62 blows

Before soaking Penetr.of Force on plunger Force on plunger

4.09 plunger Top Bottom Moisture content at compaction

4.15 mm PR(div) kN PR(div) kN Tin No. B8

4.18 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Tin + wet soil (g) 271.3

4.14 0.25 2.0 0.5 2.0 0.5 Tin + dry soil (g) 261.2

0.50 3.0 0.7 3.0 0.7 Tin alone (g) 93.3

Aftersoaking 0.75 4.5 1.0 4.5 1.0 Moisture content (%) 6.03.95 1.00 5.0 1.2 5.0 1.2

4.08 1.25 6.5 1.5 6.5 1.5 Moisture content at end of CBR.

4.11 1.50 7.5 1.7 7.5 1.7 Position Top Centre Bottom

4.05 1.75 8.0 1.8 8.0 1.8 Tin No. B17

2.00 9.0 2.1 9.0 2.1 Tin + wet soil (g) 336.8

Swell(mm) 2.25 10.0 2.3 10.0 2.3 Tin + dry soil (g) 315.5

-0.009 2.50 11.0 2.5 10.5 2.4 Tin alone (g) 90.7

dh Volume 2.75 11.5 2.6 11.0 2.5 Moisture content (%) 9.5

3.00 11.9 2.7 11.0 2.5 Average mc (%) 4.7

3.25 12.5 2.9 11.5 2.6 Density before soaking

3.50 13.0 3.0 12.0 2.8 ass of mould + soil(g) 11042

3.75 13.9 3.2 12.0 2.8 Mould number Z

4.00 14.5 3.3 12.5 2.9 ass of mould (g) 61254.25 15.0 3.5 12.5 2.9 ass of compacted soil (g) 4917

4.50 16.0 3.7 13.0 3.0 olume of compacted soil (mls) 2130

4.75 16.5 3.8 13.0 3.0 Bulk density (Kg/m3) 2.308

5.00 17.0 3.9 13.0 3.0 Dry density (Kg/m3) 1.792

5.25 17.5 4.0 14.0 3.2 Moisture content (%) 6.0

5.50 17.5 4.0 14.5 3.3 Density after soaking

5.75 18.0 4.1 15.0 3.5 ass of mould + soil(g) 11189

6.00 18.0 4.1 15.0 3.5 Mould number Z

6.25 18.5 4.3 15.5 3.6 ass of mould (g) 6125

6.50 19.0 4.4 16.0 3.7 ass of compacted soil (g) 5064

6.75 19.0 4.4 16.0 3.7 olume of compacted soil 2130mls 2130.0

7.00 19.5 4.5 16.5 3.8 Bulk density (Kg/m3) 2.377

7.25 20.0 4.6 17.0 3.9 Dry density (Kg/m

3

) 2.2707.50 20.0 4.6 17.5 4.0 Moisture content (%) 4.0


27/42

Position Top Bottom

PENETR

ATION

2.5

mm

5.0

mm

2.5

mm

5.0

mm

Maximum Dry

density

(Mg/

m3)1.793

Pr Dial

reading11.0 17.0 10.5 13.0

Optimum moisture

content(%) 10.30

Equivale

nt kN2.5 3.9 2.4 3.0

CBR

(%)19 20 18 15


28/42

MATERIAL LABORATORY TEST

CBR WORKSHEET: CH 0+000

SUBGRADE

MATERIALS Method C B A

6/4/2013 62 heavy blows, 5 layers 30 heavy blows, 5 layers

62 light blows, 3

layers

Compaction Data Bef. Soak After soak Bef. Soak After soak Bef. Soak After soak

Proving Ring Factor

(kN/div) 0.047 Mould No Z Z Y Y A AProving Ring Capacity

(kN) 40 Mass of Mould (g) 6831 6831 6832 6832 6751 6751

Mass of Mould + wet soil

(g) 11586 11596 10744 10788 11086 11092

MDD 2110 Mass of wet soil (g) 4755 4762 3956 3912 4117 4237

OMC(%) 8.5 Volume of Mould (cc) 2125 2125 2125 2125 2125 2125

Wet Density (kg/m3) 2238.000 2241.000 1841.00 1862.00 1937.00 1994.00

Moisture Content 8.5 13.3 8.40 12.30 8.30 13.1

Dry Density (kg/m3) 1.994 2.2 1.84 1.86 1.94 2.0

Compaction (%) 95.0 106.0 87.0 88.0 92.0 94.0

Moisture Content

Determination C B A

Container Number c c1 D A 42

Wt of wet soil + container (g) 289.2 222.4 215.5 296.6 222.6 236.6

Wt of dry soil + container (g) 270.4 200 202.2 281.7 209.5 212.8

Wt of container (g) 51.6 31.8 43.4 44.8 42.6 29

Wt of water (g) 18.8 22.4 13.3 16.9 13.1 24

Wt of dry soil (g) 218.8 168.4 158.8 136.9 156.9 182.8

Moisture content (%) 8.8 13.3 8.4 12.3 8.3 13.1

C B A

Penetration Data 62 blws heavy 5lyers 30 heavy blows, 5 layers 62 light blows, 3 layers

Plunger Penetration Gauge autocalc Gauge autocalc Gauge autocalc

(mm) Reading Load (kN) Reading Load (kN) Reading Load (kN)

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.5 3.5 0.7 1.0 0.6 1.0 0.21.0 4.5 1.3 2.0 1.4 2.2 0.4

1.5 5.0 1.7 2.5 1.7 3.0 0.9

2.0 6.0 2.1 4 1.9 4.3 1.5

2.5 6.5 2.5 5 2.2 5.5 2.3

3.0 7.5 2.8 6.5 2.4 6.0 2.4

3.5 8.5 3.1 7.5 2.8 6.5 2.5

4.0 9.0 3.5 8.5 2.2 7.00 2.9

4.5 10.0 3.8 9.0 3.4 8.0 3.3

5.0 11.0 4.0 10.5 4.8 9.0 3.5

5.5 12.0 4.2 11.5 4.9 9.5 3.8

6.0 12.5 43.0 13.0 5.0 10.5 4.2

6.5 14.0 4.6 14 5.2 12.0 4.5

7.0 15.0 4.7 15.4 5.6 14.0 4.77.5 0.9 48.0 16.5 5.0 16.0 4.9

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Load(kN)

Pen (mm)

Load-Penetration Curves

62 blws heavy 5lyers

30 heavy blows, 5 layers

62 light blows, 3 layers


29/42

CBR Calculations autocalc

62 blows 30 blows 62 blows

5 layers 5 layers 3 layers

CBR at 2.5mm pen (%) 19 17 17

CBR at 5.0mm pen (%) 20 24 18

autocalc

CBR (%) 20 21 18

Swell

Initia dial gauge reading 0.00 0.00 0.000

Final dial gauge reading 0.0 0.02 0.01

Difference (swell) 0.02 0.02 0.01Percentage swell 0.015

CBRsoaked - Percent MDD Relationship

CBR (%) Comp. (%)

62 Heavy blows, 5 layers 19 100

30 heavy blows, 5 layers 24 93

62 light blows, 3 layers 17 88

10

100

86 96Maximum Dry density

(%)

C

o

m

p

(%)

MATERIAL LABORATORY TESTS CBR WORKSHEETSUBGRADE


30/42

Sample description: MATERIAL

Sample

Description: CH0+500 Depth

SUBGRADE MATERIALS

62 heavy blows, 5

layers

30 heavy blows, 5

layers

62 light blows,

3 layers

Compaction

Data Bef. Soak

After

soak

Bef.

Soak After soak

Bef.

Soak

After

soak

Proving Ring

Factor (kN/div) 0.047

Mould

No A A Y Y Z Z

Proving Ring

Capacity (kN) 40

Mass of Mould

(g) 7200 7200 7231 7231 7232 7232

Mass of Mould +

wet soil (g) 11675 11678 11842 11876 11640 11660

MDD 2185Mass of wet soil(g) 4475 4498 4611 4645 4406 4426

OMC(%) 7.3

Volume of Mould

(cc) 2130 2130 2130 2130 2130 2130

Wet Density

(kg/m3) 2101.000 2112.000 2165.00 2181.00

2069.0

0

2078.0

0


Dry Density

(kg/m3) 2100.000 2120.0 2164.00 2178.00

2069.0

0 2075.0

Compaction (%) 96.0 97.0 99.0 100.0 94.0 95.0

Moisture Content

Determination C B A

Container

Number c c1 D A 42

Wt of wet soil +

container (g) 311.4 205.7 267.7 196.34 211.78 209.34Wt of dry soil +

container (g) 293.4 188.2 251.16 178.65 199.7 190.54

Wt of container

(g) 32.6 31.1 32.4 30.5 29.88 40.2

Wt of water (g) 18 17.5 16.6 19.69 12.1 18.8

Wt of dry soil

(g) 240.8 157.1 218.76 148.15 169.9 150.34

Moisture

content (%) 7.5 11.1 7.6 13.3 7.1 12.5

Penetration

Data

62 blws heavy

5lyers

30 heavy blows, 5

layers

62 light blows, 3

layers

Plunger

Penetration Gauge

autocal

c Gauge autocalc Gauge autocalc

(mm)

Readin

g

Load

(kN) Reading

Load

(kN) Reading

Load

(kN)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.5 3.5 0.7 1.0 1.8 1.0 0.2

1.0 4.5 1.4 2.0 2.1 2.2 0.4

1.5 5.0 1.9 2.5 2.5 3.0 0.9

2.0 6.0 2.8 4 2.7 4.3 1.5

2.5 6.5 3.4 5 3.1 5.5 2.3

3.0 7.5 3.5 6.5 3.4 6.0 2.4

3.5 8.5 3.7 7.5 3.7 6.5 2.5

4.0 9.0 4.6 8.5 3.8 7.00 2.7

4.5 10.0 5.3 9.0 4.1 8.0 2.9

5.0 11.0 5.4 10.5 4.2 9.0 3.0

5.5 12.0 5.6 11.5 4.4 9.5 3.3

6.0 12.5 5.7 13.0 4.5 10.5 3.4

6.5 14.0 5.9 14 4.7 12.0 3.6

7.0 15.0 6.0 15.4 4.8 14.0 3.97.5 0.9 6.0 16.5 4.9 16.0 4.1

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Load(kN)

Pen (mm)






31/42

`




CBR at 2.5mm pen (%) 26 23 17

CBR at 5.0mm pen (%) 27 21 15

autocalc

CBR (%) 27 22 16

Swell



Difference (swell) 0.02 0.02 0.01

Percentage swell 0.015


CBR (%) Comp. (%)




10

100

76 86 96Maximum Dry density (%)

C

o

m

p

(%)

MATERIAL LABORATORY TESTS CBR WORKSHEET

SUBGRADE


32/42

Sample description:

SUBGRADE

MATERIAL

Sample

Description: CH 1+000 Depth

SUBGRADE MATERIALS

62 heavy blows, 5

layers

30 heavy blows, 5

layers

62 light blows,

3 layers

Compaction

Data

Bef.

Soak

After

soak

Bef.

Soak After soak

Bef.

Soak

After

soak

Proving Ring


Mould

No A A Y Y Z Z

Proving Ring

Capacity (kN) 40

Mass of Mould

(g) 6875 6875 6751 6751 6878 6878

Mass of Mould +

wet soil (g) 11176 11238 11139 11152 11273 11294

MDD 2074

Mass of wet soil

(g) 4301 4363 4388 4401 4395 4416

OMC(%) 8.5

Volume of Mould

(cc) 2125 2125 2125 2125 2125 2125

Wet Density

(kg/m3) 2024 2053. 2065. 2071 2068. 2078.


Dry Density

(kg/m3) 2024 2051 2065.00 2069 2068. 2075

Compaction (%) 97. 98. 99. 98. 99. 100.

Moisture Content

Determination C B A

Container

Number 42 42 C5 C5 A11 A11

Wt of wet soil +container (g) 258 273 223 236.7 262.2 269.8

Wt of dry soil +

container (g) 242 249 210 216.9 245.9 250

Wt of container

(g) 52 32 52.6 29.8 50.2 52.2

Wt of water (g) 16 24 13.1 19.7 16.3 20

Wt of dry soil

(g) 190 217 156.9 187.1 195.7 197.8

Moisture

content (%) 8.0 12.1 8.4 11.0 8.3 10.0

Penetration

Data

62 blws heavy

5lyers

30 heavy blows, 5

layers

62 light blows, 3

layers

Plunger

Penetration Gauge

autocal

c Gauge autocalc Gauge autocalc

(mm)Readin

gLoad(kN) Reading

Load(kN) Reading

Load(kN)

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.5 3.5 0.7 1.0 1.8 1.0 0.5

1.0 4.5 1.3 2.0 2.1 2.2 1.3

1.5 5.0 1.9 2.5 2.5 3.0 1.6

2.0 6.0 2.8 4 2.7 4.3 2.1

2.5 6.5 3.2 5 3.0 5.5 2.3

3.0 7.5 3.4 6.5 3.2 6.0 2.4

3.5 8.5 3.6 7.5 3.4 6.5 2.6

4.0 9.0 4.0 8.5 3.5 7.00 2.7

4.5 10.0 4.2 9.0 3.7 8.0 3.0

5.0 11.0 4.5 10.5 4.0 9.0 3.1

5.5 12.0 4.6 11.5 4.2 9.5 3.3

6.0 12.5 4.8 13.0 4.5 10.5 3.5

6.5 14.0 5.0 14 4.7 12.0 3.67.0 15.0 5.3 15.4 4.8 14.0 3.9

7.5 0.9 6.0 16.5 4.9 16.0 4.1

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Load(kN

)

Pen (mm)






33/42

CBR

Calculations

Autocal

c

62

blows 30 blows 62 blows


CBR at 2.5mm

pen (%) 24 22 17

CBR at 5.0mm

pen (%) 22 20 16

Autocalc

CBR (%) 23 21 17

Swell

Initia dial gauge

reading 0.00 0.00 0.000 `

Final dial gauge

reading 0.0 0.00 0.00



CBRsoaked - Percent MDD

Relationship

CBR(%)

Comp.(%)

62 Heavy blows,

5 layers 24 98

30 heavy blows, 5

layers 20 99

62 light blows, 3

layers 17 100

10

100

88 98Maximum Dry density (%)

C

o

m

p

(%)


34/42


Sample description:

SUB BASE

MATERIALS

Sample Description: CH 0+000 Depth

SUB BASE MATERIALS

62 heavy blows, 5

layers

30 heavy blows, 5

layers

62 light blows, 3

layers

Compaction Data Bef. Soak After soak Bef. Soak After soak

Bef.

Soak

After

soak

Proving Ring

Factor (kN/div) 0.047 Mould No A A Y Y Z Z

Proving Ring

Capacity (kN) 40 Mass of Mould (g) 6874 6874 6302 6302 6751 6751

Mass of Mould + wet

soil (g) 11218 11230 10620 10643 10971 11039

MDD 2058 Mass of wet soil (g) 4344 4356 4318 4341 4221 4288

OMC(%) 9.0 Volume of Mould (cc) 2125 2125 2125 2125 2125 2125

Wet Density (kg/m3) 2044 2050 2032 2043 1986 2018


Dry Density (kg/m3) 2044.000 2047.0 2031.00 2040.00 1986.00 2015.0

Compaction (%) 99.0 99.0 98.0 99.0 96.0 98.0

Moisture Content

Determination C B A

Container Number C2 C2 C5 C5 A11 A11

Wt of wet soil + container

(g) 307.4 360 244.7 236.7 216.6 205.7

Wt of dry soil + container

(g) 286.7 326 227 216.9 195.2 183.5

Wt of container (g) 51 50.2 45 29.8 32 31.1

Wt of water (g) 20.7 34.2 19 19.7 21.3 21.2

Wt of dry soil (g) 235.6 276 178 187.1 164.1 153.4

Moisture content

(%) 8.8 12.4 8.4 9.1 13.0 13.8

Penetration Data

62 blws heavy

5lyers

30 heavy blows, 5

layers

62 light blows, 3

layers

Plunger

Penetration Gauge autocalc Gauge autocalc Gauge autocalc

(mm) Reading

Load

(kN) Reading Load (kN) Reading Load (kN)

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.5 3.5 0.7 1.0 1.8 1.0 0.5

1.0 4.5 1.3 2.0 2.1 2.2 1.3

1.5 5.0 1.9 2.5 2.5 3.0 1.6

2.0 6.0 2.8 4 2.7 4.3 2.1

2.5 6.5 3.3 5 3.2 5.5 2.3

3.0 7.5 3.4 6.5 3.3 6.0 2.4

3.5 8.5 3.6 7.5 3.4 6.5 2.6

4.0 9.0 4.0 8.5 3.5 7.00 2.7

4.5 10.0 4.2 9.0 3.7 8.0 3.0

5.0 11.0 4.3 10.5 4.1 9.0 3.2

5.5 12.0 4.5 11.5 4.2 9.5 3.3

6.0 12.5 4.7 13.0 4.5 10.5 3.5

6.5 14.0 5.0 14 4.7 12.0 3.6

7.0 15.0 5.3 15.4 4.8 14.0 3.9

7.5 0.9 6.0 16.5 4.9 16.0 4.1

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Load(kN)

Pen (mm)






35/42




CBR at 2.5mm pen (%) 26 22 18

CBR at 5.0mm pen (%) 22 21 16

autocalc

CBR (%) 24 22 17






CBR (%) Comp. (%)




10

100

95

C

o

m

p

(%)


36/42


Sample description:

SUB BASE

MATERIALS

Sample

Description: CH 0+000 Depth

SUB BASE MATERIALS

62 heavy blows, 5

layers

30 heavy blows, 5

layers

62 light blows, 3

layers

Compaction Data Bef. Soak After soak Bef. SoakAfter soak

Bef.

Soak

After

soak

Proving Ring


Mould

No

Proving Ring

Capacity (kN) 40 Mass of Mould (g) 7234 7234 6736 6736 7100 7100

Mass of Mould +

wet soil (g) 11218 11230 10620 10643 10971 11039

MDD 2124

Mass of wet soil

(g) 4747 4886 4651 4857 4367 4525

OMC(%) 9.8

Volume of Mould

(cc) 2125 2125 2125 2125 2125 2125

Wet Density

(kg/m3) 2233 2235 2188 2266 2136 2140


Dry Density

(kg/m3) 2230.000 2232.0 2186.00 2262.00 2130.00 2015.0

Compaction (%) 96.0 97.0 98.0 97.0 96.0 88.0Moisture Content

Determination C B A

Container

Number C2 C2 C5 C5 A11 A11

Wt of wet soil +

container (g) 307.4 360 244.7 236.7 216.6 205.7

Wt of dry soil + container

(g) 286.7 326 227 216.9 195.2 183.5

Wt of container

(g) 51 50.2 45 29.8 32 31.1

Wt of water (g) 20.7 34.2 19 19.7 21.3 21.2

Wt of dry soil (g) 235.6 276 178 187.1 164.1 153.4

Moisture content

(%) 8.5 14.1 8.6 15.1 8.5 15.3

Penetration

Data

62 blws heavy

5lyers

30 heavy blows, 5

layers

62 light blows, 3

layers

Plunger

Penetration Gauge autocalc Gauge autocalc Gauge autocalc

(mm)

Readin

g

Load

(kN) Reading Load (kN) Reading

Load

(kN)

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0.5 3.5 0.7 1.0 1.8 1.0 0.5

1.0 4.5 1.3 2.0 2.1 2.2 1.3

1.5 5.0 1.9 2.5 2.5 3.0 1.6

2.0 6.0 2.8 4 2.8 4.3 2.1

2.5 6.5 3.4 5 3.4 5.5 2.4

3.0 7.5 3.6 6.5 3.6 6.0 2.6

3.5 8.5 3.6 7.5 3.8 6.5 2.7

4.0 9.0 4.0 8.5 4.0 7.00 2.9

4.5 10.0 4.2 9.0 4.3 8.0 3.2

5.0 11.0 4.3 10.5 4.5 9.0 3.4

5.5 12.0 4.5 11.5 4.8 9.5 3.6

6.0 12.5 4.7 13.0 4.9 10.5 3.7

6.5 14.0 5.0 14 5.1 12.0 3.9

7.0 15.0 5.3 15.4 5.3 14.0 4.17.5 0.9 6.0 16.5 5.4 16.0 4.5

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Load(kN)

Pen (mm)






37/42




CBR at 2.5mm pen (%) 26 26 18

CBR at 5.0mm pen (%) 22 21 17

autocalc

CBR (%) 24 24 18






CBR (%) Comp. (%)

62 Heavy blows, 5

layers 24 96

30 heavy blows, 5

layers 24 97

62 light blows, 3 layers 18 92 10

100

88 98

C

o

m

p

(%)Maximum Dry density (%)


38/42

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY MATERIAL TESTS

TEST CH 0+000 CH 0+250 CH 0+500

CBR TEST

62 blows 5layers 4.5kg 20 21 18






COMPACTION TEST

MDD (Kg/m3) 2110 2185 2074

OMC (%) 8.5 7.3 8.5

SIEVE ANALYSIS TEST

BS Method of soil classification

Fines (%) 23.85 20.3 24.25

Sand (%) 68.1 68.4 68.3

Gravel (%) 0.05 11.3 7.45


39/42

Weight of

axle(tones)

Mid point

(L)

Equivalent factor

(L/8.2)4.55Number of

vehicles (N)

Standard axles

=(EFXN)


40/42

TRAFFIC CALCATION:

Equivalent factor (EF) = (L/8.2)4.55

Standard axle (SA) = Equivalent factor x Standard axle.

Number of standard axle per commercial vehicle

=Total number of standard axle

Total number of comm. vehicle

=481.9788 SA1540/7CV

2.1908SA

CV

Standard axle per day (t) =481.97887days

=68.85SA/day.


41/42

COMULATIVE EQUIVALENT STANDARD AXLE LOAD (C.E.S.A.L)

For the design,

Standard axle per day (t) =68.85SA/day

Design life (n) =3years.

Growth rate (r) =5%.

Then,

C.E.S.A.L=365Xtx[(1+r)n -1]

r =365x68.85x[(1+0.05)3-1 ]

0.05

C.E.S.A.L =79,223.111

Cumulative equivalent standard axle load (c.E.S.A.L.) = 0.792231X106


42/42

REFERENCE

Administration, T. M. (2000). Laboratory TestingManuals. Dar es Salaam: Novum Grafisk AS, Skjetten

Norway.

S.K.Kanna-C.EG.Justo. (1991). Highway Engineering.Roorkee247667, INDIA: NEM CHAND &BROS.ROORKEE(U.P).

Work, T. M. (1999). Pavement and Materials DesignManual. Dar es Salaam: Allkopi AS, Oslo Norway.

Paschal Adaus

Documents